‘Most corrupt govt of last 19 years excluded from probe’

[VCheng]

"Pakistani tradition"?

Absolutely. Every previous accountability process in Pakistan has been selective, just like the present one. I guess that would make it a tradition.

Only thing is right now the government has it's hands full with more immediate issues.

Fair enough. But letting Gen Musharraf off the hook is being selective in accountability.

 

[Baby Leone]

its not about how much corruption as barometer, its about the amount PTI is talking about which TI dont consider as they just take overall situation not the financial loss due to it.

pls correct me if i am wrong.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Yes to that. To put is bluntly Mush was nobody. Clinton had scorned him. Then suddenly 9/11 happened. Mush prostituted Pakistan's strategic assets in Kabul to get US dollars and recognition. This enabled to to hobble about with Bush on world stage writing books on how he sold his country. At home he curried favour by using those prostituted dollars to buy crooks to extend his rule. He allied himself with mullahs in NWFP and Indian mafia agent Altaf in Karachi to extend his rule. That is about as bad as it gets. To cap it all the sole excuse he had for the coup - Nawaz came back even stronger for more loot. All in all a disaster.

Only thing is right now the government has it's hands full with more immediate issues.

"Pakistani tradition"?

bUt He sAVed us FrOm sTone age and shiett muh enlighten moderation-Some Mushy supporter Uncle be like

 

[SQ8]

Wrong move. Both Zia’s and Musharraf’s regime should be part of probe. Massive corruption was carried out within the military and it should not be excused at the behest of the establishment.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Yes to that. To put is bluntly Mush was nobody. Clinton had scorned him. Then suddenly 9/11 happened. Mush prostituted Pakistan's strategic assets in Kabul to get US dollars and recognition.

Clinton was the one that started the whole shift to India once he took office in 1993 he did try to mediate the Kashmir conflict but guess what stopped him those Ganghus diaspora tho we did had folks like Mansoor Ijaz who was quite friendly to both the Clintons and the Bushes the Indian lobby got a boost post 9/11 but nevertheless Clinton was instrumental in shifting South Asia policy Indo Centric before it was about playing the both sides in South Asia

Same in UK. If you lived through Thatcher years you would know. And US is not above that either. Mccarthy ring a bell?

I heard she is unliked by most folks there for those reforms done in the 1980s

Rare archaic word. Is this common in US? And no. It is not. It's called context. It's called giving referance to what is being discussed. You claimed a fact. That is. Selective contribution is unique to Pakistan making it a 'Pakistani tradition'.

I disputed that. Now I could have said 'no' but in a discussion if you dispute somebodies claim you beef it up with some facts. I did. I have in my life seen selective accountability practiced by Margatr Thatcher in 1980s UK. USA saw it in the Mccarthy era.

Just chucking "whatabata" is merely givving of smokescrean without attending to the point I raised.

Well add in pessimism you got that

 

[Lincoln]

If that was the case then why did PPP or PMLn not do an accountability of Pervaiz Musharraf's govt? That's pure BS.
PTI cannot expand the scope of investigation to the past 70 yrs.. so it is prudent and a lot more fruitful to investigate the last 10 years regardless of who has been ruling the country.

Musharraf sold the country. He was willing to do anything for the Americans if they would covertly help him retain power.

 

[war&peace]

Musharraf sold the country. He was willing to do anything for the Americans if they would covertly help him retain power.

Nothing new.. I have been saying this for quite some time. This is the problem of all the dictators, they simply do not want to leave the power. If Zia-u-Haq was not murdered by the hostile agency, he would continue ruling until he died or ousted in coup.

 

[Musafir117]

Dangerous thread
Qoumi salmiet ka masla hai

 

[Kabira]

Doubt there is much against Musharraf in terms of monetary corruption. What NAB should do is probe all those public office holders current or former to explain their extraordinary wealth increase.

They can check bank accounts, benami properties etc There are not many politicians who became rich overnight apart from whole Sharif’s clan and Zardari anyway.

 

[Sine Nomine]

So for now these traitors are going to have to be overlooked.

Correct:-
These traitors are going to have to be overlooked forever.

Doubt there is much against Musharraf in terms of monetary corruption. What NAB should do is probe all those public office holders current or former to explain their extraordinary wealth increase.

They can check bank accounts, benami properties etc There are not many politicians who became rich overnight apart from whole Sharif’s clan and Zardari anyway.

Brown babus are elephant in room,about which no one talks.

 

[tkmd]

Funny how people are saying Musharraf is not a threat so that's why his govt has escaped scrutiny. When the real reason is likely that his younger GHQ friends are the ones running the show and why on earth would they start scrutinizing their own people....Allah only knows the corruption and ugly truths one would find if that happened.

And as to previous gov'ts not investigating....lol. As if GHQ would allow it. LOL.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Musharraf was an incompetent leader. Several instances in Kargil war and in 2001 Indian parliament attack showed his lack if competence. He simply followed his USA master's plans and had no idea what to do next if India retaliated.

Nawaz Shariff was more reasonable in his conduct and behaved after proper calculation. He rarely did a move without having further plans.

So, being an Indian, I find Musharraf extremely stupid and hence dependent on USA for his survival whereas Nawaz was intelligent. So, I would see Musharraf as extremely corrupt while Nawaz as honest.